We’ve now posted the FPR conference schedule. Based on feedback from recent conferences, we’ve built a bit more elbow room into the schedule to allow for more mingling and discussion. It’s shaping up to be a great weekend of conversation and a time to make new acquaintances and renew old friendships. Do consider joining us.
“Why I Changed my Mind about Volunteering.” When confronted with large issues like homelessness or climate change, Rachel Cohen asks why the default response for many people is to offload responsibility onto others: “Why did I think only about structural change and disregard more immediate help? And why don’t I do more of those day-to-day charitable things, or know many people who do, either?”
“Our Home Sweet Home?” John G. Grove outlines the possibilities for a politics actually rooted in beloved places: “To any traditional conservative, there is something invigorating about hearing a politician invoke home or place as the basis of our political life. Such an invocation seemingly challenges the notion that America is defined by infinitely malleable philosophical premises. The populist nationalist rhetoric that has emerged in the United States and Europe over the past decade pits itself against universalism and globalism, which can make it seem like the “local” alternative. But the rhetoric tends to be skin-deep. Especially in America, a politics built around home cannot be nationalist.”
“So, a Chatbot Did Your Homework.” Jacob Riyeff processes the growing frustration he feels while serving as the director of his university’s academic integrity committee: “The activity of the intellect here is a kind of knowledge that is non-instrumental. This does not mean that it cannot be used for something else outside the human subject, but that its primary (and sine qua non) aspect is the formation of the human subject as one who understands the nature of the world and its parts in ever clearer and more complex ways.”
“Why We Need Amistics for AI.” Brian J. A. Boyd draws on Neal Stephenson’s Seveneves to propose a communal approach to questions of AI use: “If we are to live well with AI, we must recognize and emphasize this level of ethical formation that is neither individual nor universal, not zero-sum but free-range. To act for the common good requires a community that understands its shared ends and goals. We must find ways for politics to enable meaningful decision making to take place in actual communities and cultures, rather than in higher, more abstracted contexts.”
“Which Comes First: Good Citizens or Good Governments?” Bonnie Kristian reviews two new books and grapples with possibilities for improving civic health through a top down or a bottom up approach: “My expectation, going into both books, was that I’d find Skach’s solutions humbler and thus more feasible. I can’t make Congress stop shirking responsibility, but I can plant a garden and share the tomatoes. If the Titanic really is sinking, perhaps arranging the deck chairs is truly all you can do (or even a service you should do). But I finished American Covenant far more in Levin’s camp than Skach’s, persuaded that his approach is sounder on several counts.”
“Ideologies Have Their Reasons.” Malloy Owen reviews Jason Blakely’s Lost in Ideology: Interpreting Modern Political Life and wrestles with the limitations of the ideologies by which we map reality yet also the necessity of relying on such maps: “To use the map is to submit to its authority, and you cannot use two maps at once. Or rather, you can carry around a backpack full of maps, as many people do, but when you reach a crossroads, you will have to choose which one to believe. In a world in which the map contains information about the territory that is not wholly and finally discernible from the territory itself, it is hard to see any alternative to getting ‘lost in ideology’ in Blakely’s sense.”
“Hope for God’s Creation: Stewardship in an Age of Futility.” Lionel Windsor reviews Andrew Spencer’s helpful guide to Christian stewardship: “Ironically, one of the book’s greatest strengths—its irenic and balanced tone throughout—may sadly end up being a weakness in terms of its reception. Given the highly polarized nature of the present debate over climate change, it could be easy for both ‘sides’ to reject the book because it is not shrill enough. I pray that this is not the case, however, and encourage evangelicals to thoughtfully consider the strengths and implications of Spencer’s arguments as we live in hope, grounded in the gospel of Christ crucified and risen, in God’s created world.”
“The Rise of Cultural Christianity.” Focusing on the British context, Madeleine Davies reflects on the influence that writers like Tom Holland have had in making Christianity, in all its “weirdness,” trendy in some circles: “Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s testimony, the popularity of Jordan Peterson’s therapeutic exposition of the Christian scriptures and the emphasis on the Christian foundations of the nation at conservative gatherings, bringing together politicians (like Miriam Cates, Michael Gove and Danny Kruger) and philosophers, are among the developments that invite questions that might have been regarded as the sole preserve of theologians. What is the nature of conversion? Who gets to call themselves a Christian?” (Recommended by Adam Smith.)
“It’s Time for a Bonus, Baby.” Patrick T. Brown makes the case for cash payments to new parents: “At a time when new parents’ heads are spinning, a baby bonus would be a sensible, tangible benefit that can help get their new lives off to a solid start. More importantly, it would be a signal to everyone that America considers parenthood worth investing in.”
“Farming in Chicago.” Nathan Beacom ponders the decline of urban farming and wonders what the prospects are for a rebirth: “What happens as a city loses its connection to the land? Once lost, can it be brought back? In Chicago, people are beginning to realize that city and country, industry and agriculture, cannot be separated and that the one depends upon the other. While local food cultivation in Chicago all but disappeared in the middle of the last century, there are those who, in however small a way, are working to bring it back. It is necessary work, not just for this city but for all modern cities, if their fate is not to be the exploitation, and ultimately depletion, of the resources on which they depend.”
“The Government Spends Millions to Open Grocery Stores in Food Deserts. The Real Test Is Their Survival.” Molly Parker describes what happened at one grocery story celebrated for opening in an Illinois food desert and considers what it takes for such stories to stay afloat: “Although sales were initially strong, they slumped as residents fell back into old shopping patterns, patronizing the two nearby Dollar General stores or traveling to Walmart and other supermarkets at least 30 miles outside of town. As fewer customers came in, the store had less money to restock its most popular items. Shelves grew emptier.” (Recommend by Dominic Garzonio.)
